pplx_gpt56_terra_thinking

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavior. It only mentions cost, omitting traits like whether it's read-only, rate limits, or side effects. The 'thinking' trait is name-inferred, not explained.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Very short and front-loaded with model name and cost, but it sacrifices essential information. Could be expanded without losing conciseness.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Despite an output schema, the description fails to explain what the tool returns or how to use its parameters. For a tool with 0% schema coverage and no annotations, this is inadequate.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 0%, meaning description provides no parameter details. The three parameters (query, source_focus, conversation_id) are completely unexplained, leaving the agent with no guidance.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description identifies the tool as GPT-5.6 Terra with thinking, distinguishing it from the non-thinking sibling pplx_gpt56_terra. However, it lacks a verb stating what the tool does (e.g., generates, answers), relying on context.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The cost hint ('COSTS 1 PRO SEARCH QUERY') implies usage when thinking is needed and budget allows, but no explicit guidance on when to choose this vs alternatives like pplx_sonar or other thinking models.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.